How to represent Fallschirmjager and SS in Normandy

[DWPetros]

I'm trying to determine the best way to represent certain particular German units that fought in the Normandy campaigns.

Specifically, how to best represent the Fallshirmjager units that fought in/around Carentan? My guess is to use the 548 and/or 537 units to start with. OTOH, the 447 might also be right, depending.

Regarding the SS units - there were various divisions involved, and each one would need to be represented properly. I'm looking at the 17th Pz.Div. - and think it would be 658 and or 548s?

Opinions welcomed.

 

[aiabx]

Going by Beevor's D-Day: The Battle for Normandy, I'd say 4-4-7's. They did not come across as an impressive formation.

 

[DWPetros]

Going by Beevor's D-Day: The Battle for Normandy, I'd say 4-4-7's. They did not come across as an impressive formation.

Will look at that, thanks. Using a 537 for the Fallschirmjager troops might be a little better given their inherent armaments. 447s are pretty lame.

 

[Vinnie]

Lots and lots of MGs.
The formation was not impressive but they had almost doubled the number of machines guns.
One LMG per 2 squads, one MMG per 5 squads etc.

 

[Old Noob]

I'd go one step down for the initial SS unit (17th PanzerGrenadier), as they were not a completely constituted SS formation.
For the follow-on SS units, 6-5-8s should do.

 

[DWPetros]

I'd go one step down for the initial SS unit (17th PanzerGrenadier), as they were not a completely constituted SS formation.
For the follow-on SS units, 6-5-8s should do.

Sounds right. I just read about the 17th and as you say they weren't exactly the most tip-top units. I was thinking of having them as the 537s, and 548s for Fallschirmjager.

 

[synicbast]

17th PzGrenadier only got most of their more up to date armour within the last 6 weeks before D-day so were less than optimally familiarised with their vehicles. As for the troops themselves, a great deal of them had been press-ganged almost into uniform from Alsace-Lorraine and were classified as "Volksdeutscher" albeit not voluntarily. While the FJs weren't at their best strength or quality they had a solid core of veterans at least and reasonable, if argumentative (amongst themselves) leadership

 

[wrongway149]

Looking at Massimioliona Afiero's Íllustrated History of the 17th SS Gotz von 'Berlichen" -- They did not have much as far as heavy or AT weapons (Nary even panzerschreck) and had many Italians from the "Alpini' who were stuck in France after Italy's capitulation. But all indications are that they fought well, so I'd give them 548 SS, maybe a 4 ELR (could be talked into a 3) but substitute down to 447. Leadership should be fairly low quality for German units, topping out at 9-1in most common ASL situations.

Not the best, but far from Óstruppen overall. Plus most of those Alsatian draftees were young and fresh.

 

[wrongway149]

Lots and lots of MGs.
The formation was not impressive but they had almost doubled the number of machines guns.
One LMG per 2 squads, one MMG per 5 squads etc.

A 547/548 covers that idea, albeit abstractly.

 

[von Marwitz]

Looking at Massimioliona Afiero's Íllustrated History of the 17th SS Gotz von 'Berlichen" -- They did not have much as far as heavy or AT weapons (Nary even panzerschreck) and had many Italians from the "Alpini' who were stuck in France after Italy's capitulation. But all indications are that they fought well, so I'd give them 548 SS, maybe a 4 ELR (could be talked into a 3) but substitute down to 447. Leadership should be fairly low quality for German units, topping out at 9-1in most common ASL situations.

Not the best, but far from Óstruppen overall. Plus most of those Alsatian draftees were young and fresh.

Just some language service by a native speaker:

It would be "Götz von Berlichingen" and "Osttruppen" or "Ost-Truppen".

von Marwitz

 

[synicbast]

Looking at Massimioliona Afiero's Íllustrated History of the 17th SS Gotz von 'Berlichen" -- They did not have much as far as heavy or AT weapons (Nary even panzerschreck) and had many Italians from the "Alpini' who were stuck in France after Italy's capitulation. But all indications are that they fought well, so I'd give them 548 SS, maybe a 4 ELR (could be talked into a 3) but substitute down to 447. Leadership should be fairly low quality for German units, topping out at 9-1in most common ASL situations.

Not the best, but far from Óstruppen overall. Plus most of those Alsatian draftees were young and fresh.

not sure that the 1943 draftees were particularly willing either as they were born and raised French until 1940 and also by 1943-44, civilian rations were far from ideal so I'm not sure Fresh is the right term
.. I would almost be tempted to eliminate the -1 Elite for HOB for GvB troops as well and an ELR of 4 would be generous, one of 5 absurd.

 

[wrongway149]

not sure that the 1943 draftees were particularly willing either as they were born and raised French until 1940 and also by 1943-44, civilian rations were far from ideal so I'm not sure Fresh is the right term
.. I would almost be tempted to eliminate the -1 Elite for HOB for GvB troops as well and an ELR of 4 would be generous, one of 5 absurd.

HoB is too rare of a game occurrence to warrant the SSR verbiage

We also have to keep this in context. What happens in game terms, relative to all other things in the game environment? Did they just fall apart and become a broken mob, like Ostruppen or Milice? There is no evidence of that. (In fact, they fought well considering the forces and force multipliers against them.) Since we are reducing their leadership, what next? We are trying to give them a unique flavor representing their composition, training, TO&E, but most importantly -- what happened when they engaged their opponents?

Looking no further than squad stats vs. squad stats is a short-sighted approach, IMO.

My conclusion for GvB in Normandy: 548 SS /ELR 3-4 (as much an element for game balance as historical flavor, IMO),
ML not underlined, sub to 447 then to 436
Mediocre leadership.
Spraying fire.
Slightly better with MGs, but worse with AT weapons (HINT: even PFs were rare in the first week or so after the landings)

Some variables will also depend on scenario size, etc.

-Pete

 

[synicbast]

HoB is too rare of a game occurrence to warrant the SSR verbiage

We also have to keep this in context. What happens in game terms, relative to all other things in the game environment? Did they just fall apart and become a broken mob, like Ostruppen or Milice? There is no evidence of that. (In fact, they fought well considering the forces and force multipliers against them.) Since we are reducing their leadership, what next? We are trying to give them a unique flavor representing their composition, training, TO&E, but most importantly -- what happened when they engaged their opponents?

Looking no further than squad stats vs. squad stats is a short-sighted approach, IMO.

My conclusion for GvB in Normandy: 548 SS /ELR 3-4 (as much an element for game balance as historical flavor, IMO),
ML not underlined, sub to 447 then to 436
Mediocre leadership.
Spraying fire.
Slightly better with MGs, but worse with AT weapons (HINT: even PFs were rare in the first week or so after the landings)

Some variables will also depend on scenario size, etc.

-Pete

I agree with your solution, in fact that is pretty how I played around with the GvB troops and armour when tinkering with the CH Action at Carentan scenarios in my mini tournament curently running because they were very bare bones indeed. Where I differ is purely opinion in that I feel they were very much carried by the Fsjgr throughout rather than pulling their own weight.

 

[wrongway149]

I agree with your solution, in fact that is pretty how I played around with the GvB troops and armour when tinkering with the CH Action at Carentan scenarios in my mini tournament curently running because they were very bare bones indeed. Where I differ is purely opinion in that I feel they were very much carried by the Fsjgr throughout rather than pulling their own weight.

But would that be like saying that Easy company pulled their weight- but Fox and Dog did not?

 

[Vinnie]

Consider the circumstances where they were employed. It takes little training to sit in a bunker and pull the triggeer on an MG. It takes much greater to lauchthe attack against that bunker. How did the troops progess when going forwards? The Fallschirmjager were very well supplied with MG and ammo in Normandy. I don't think they were particularly good troops.
Additionally, how often were they facing top quality troops? Or was this the first time those troops had gone into action?

 

[synicbast]

But would that be like saying that Easy company pulled their weight- but Fox and Dog did not?

Not the same analogy IMO, because the Fallschirmjäger were a completely separate unit with a great deal of combat experience and diverse training compared to GvB, who were pretty much raw. The closest example I can think of in terms of disparity of experience and training is the Australians in Papua New Guinea where the militia units were quite a step behind the regulars, But I do think you've got the game effect right with your suggested application. All we're now doing is discussing diverse interpretations of historical performance, which is fun. But I think your solution to Don's query is the way to go. I'm just a little more critical of GvB's quality than some.

 

[wrongway149]

But I do think you've got the game effect right with your suggested application. All we're now doing is discussing diverse interpretations of historical performance, which is fun. But I think your solution to Don's query is the way to go. I'm just a little more critical of GvB's quality than some.

548 --> 447 is quite a drop in quality!

 

[FrankH.]

I'm trying to determine the best way to represent certain particular German units that fought in the Normandy campaigns.

Specifically, how to best represent the Fallshirmjager units that fought in/around Carentan? My guess is to use the 548 and/or 537 units to start with. OTOH, the 447 might also be right, depending.

Regarding the SS units - there were various divisions involved, and each one would need to be represented properly. I'm looking at the 17th Pz.Div. - and think it would be 658 and or 548s?

Opinions welcomed.

From my understanding the 6th parachute regiment fighting around Carenten was very well equipped and fairly well trained (similar to the 352nd Inf. Division), and I think almost exclusively composed of Germans. So I would represent their squads mostly with the 5-4-8s but with maybe a scattering of 5-3-7s. Ideally the 548 would replace to the 5-3-7 - or to a 1st line 5-4-7 if such were possible. I would almost certainly give an ELR of 4 for this regiment.

The 17th SS Division, from my understanding, was sourced from a variety of nationalities. And, though reasonably well trained, its equipment was not up to par by any means compared to the first 12 SS divisions. And due to the distance it had to travel to reach Normandy it arrived with very limited (i.e., almost no) heavy equipment, and even limited company SW, and it had very limited late model equipment of any kind. Some of what was lacking arrived later, up to after June 6th - too late for the early battles. I would give an ELR of 3 or 4 for this unit. And infantry SW of even less than the standard fully equipped infantry company for the time (per 1944), at least for the MMGs and The HMGs. I would represent these SS squads by a 5-4-8 - if that is possible - rather than a 6-5-8. Plus a scattering of SS 4-4-7s. And a SS 5-4-8 replacing to a SS 4-4-7.

If I am correct, at the time of Normany the 17th SS Division had a really wide mix of captured (French), and old vehicles, combat and otherwise, and a similar mix guns - similar to the 21st Pz. Division but with even less work for upgrading them to the expected 1944 combat environment (to counter a full invasion rather than small cross channel raids). (Others probably know more about this than I do.)

However, both units elite in terms of leadership, and, in the case of the 6th parachute regiment, in terms of SW allocation.

 

[synicbast]

548 --> 447 is quite a drop in quality!

I want it go further - no elite -1 DRM, Inexperienced crews for armor, no -1 German drm for leader creation.

 

[FrankH.]

Sounds right. I just read about the 17th and as you say they weren't exactly the most tip-top units. I was thinking of having them as the 537s, and 548s for Fallschirmjager.

Specifically for the small arms of the squad I would use a mix of SS 5-4-8 and SS 4-4-7 for the 17th SS Div. But with limited SW allocations. I think this division had plenty of training, just limited weapons beyond the squad arms - for the first one or two weeks of combat. See also my longer response.